The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954)(about) |
Previous issue
Wednesday 23 March 1921
Next issue
Send to:
|
3 corrections, most recently by annmanley - Show corrections
IN DIVORCE.
(Before Mr. Justice Gordon.)
DECREES ABSOLUTE.
Decrees absolute were pronounced and the marriages declared dissolved in the following suits :— Hannah Marie Whiteman v Albon Carlyle Whiteman, Mattie Elaine Small v Edelgrave Ernest Small, Jemima Elizabeth Nicholson v John Nicholson, Maude Flora O'Neill v Arthur O'Neill, Patrick George Skeham v Olive Margaret Skeham, Francis Henry Crosbee v Florence Lydia Crosbee,
Fanny Munro Ross v William Ross, Ruth Matilda McEwen v James Joseph McEwen, Ellen Johannah Ashley v John Ashley, Marion Paulina Josephson v Edgar James Josephson, Ernest Harrop v Emily Harrop, Elizabeth Jane Chapman v Harry Percy Templeton Chapman, Mildred Rogers v Kenneth Henry Rogers, Walter Norman Riley v Ivy Kathleen Roper Riley, Arthur Thomas Holloway v An- nie Eve Holloway, Sara Gill v Alfred Gill, Blanche May Radnidge v Cecil William Rad- nidge, Victor Tom Stirling v Phyllis Catherine Stirling, Wilfred Phillip Templeman v Ethel Winifred Aird (falsely called Templeman).
DECREES NISI.
Decrees nisi were pronounced, returnable in six months, in the suits of Edward Pilling v Elizabeth Pilling, on issues found in the Dis- trict Court, Wollongong, on February 24; George Organ Rixon v Violet May Rixon, on issues found by Judge White, at the District Court, Tamworth, on February 2.
MALONEY v MALONEY.
Patrick Maloney petitioned for a dissolu- tion of his marriage with Martha Maloney (formerly Gard), whom he accused of having committed adultery with one Arthur Wilkin- son, who was joined as co-respondent. Pe- titioner and respondent were married in De- cember, 1889, at Albury, according to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church. Issues were raised in a cross-petition, on behalf of the respondent, as to whether the petitioner was guilty of such neglect or misconduct as conduced to the adultery alleged, and de- sertion. Mr. Perry (instructed by Messrs. Thomas Rose and Dawes) appeared for the petitioner; and Mr. Moseley for the respon- dent. The co-respondont appeared in per- son. After hearing evidence, his Honor dis- missed the husband's petition, whereupon the wife withdrew her suit. The co-respondent was ordered to pay the costs, incidental to proving the adultery.
(Before Mr. Justice James.)
FEWINGS v FEWINGS.
Desertion was the ground on which Lisa Georgina Sophia Fewings (formerly Hantken de Prudhill) petitioned for a divorce from Percival Pullen Fewings, to whom she was married at Breen, Gloucestershire, England, on July 10, 1907, according to the rites of the Church of England. Mr. Toose (instructed by Mr. J. W. Abigail) appeared for the peti- tioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in six months.
FISHER v FISHER.
Ethel Lill Victoria Maude Fisher (formerly Washington Brown) was the petitioner in a suit for divorce from Charles Cornelius Fisher, on the ground of desertion. The par- ties were married at Sydney on July 12, 1906, according to the rites of the New Unitarian Church. Mr. F. J. Tanner appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decred nisi, which was made returnable in six months.
SHERRY v SHERRY.
John Green Sherry was the petitioner in a suit against Harriett Emily Sherry (formerly Thacker) for a dissolution of tho marriage, on the ground of desertion, by reason of her having failed to comply with a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The parties were married at Bankstown on December 23, 1916, according to the rites of the Church of England. Mr. Harper (in- structed by Messrs. Dawson and Herford) ap- peared for the petitioner. His Honor grant- ed a decree nisi, returnable in six months.
WATSON v WATSON.
This was a petition by Matilda Mary Watson (formerly Drittliffe) for a divorce from Stan- ley James Watson, on the ground of adultery. The parties were married at Wickham, on June 19, 1911, according to the rites of the Anglican Church. Mr. W. B. Simpson (in- structed by Mr. Clifton Penny) appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in six months.
CLUBB v CLUBB.
This was a petition by Henry Edward Clubb for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against Anna Teresa Clubb (formerly Hahn), to whom he was married, in Sydney, on June 10, 1915, according to the rites of the Church of England. Mr. W. M. Daley appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree directing the respondent to return to the petitioner within 21 days of service upon her
of a copy of the decree.
SACH v SACH.
Maurice Sach petitioned for a dissolution of his marriage with Rose Emma Sach (for- merly Harris) on the ground of adultery with W. Sawyer, who was joined as co- respondent. The parties were married at the Registry Office, Stradford, England, on Octo- ber 6, 1910. Mr. L. C. Elliott appeared for the petitioner. The matter was allowed to stand over for further evidence.
BAKER v BAKER.
The petitioner, Arthur Richard Baker, sought a divorce from Catherine Baker (formerly
McCarthy) on the ground of adultery with William Myers, who was joined as co-res- pondent. The parties were married at Red- fern, on August 10, 1908, according to the rites of the Anglican Church. Mr. L. .C. Elliott appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, which was made returnable in six months.
STRACHAN v STRACHAN.
This was a petition by Frederick William Strachan for a divorce from Clare Strachan (formerly Keogh), to whom he was married at Newtown, on January 14, 1916, according to the rites of the Methodist Church, on the ground of desertion, by reason of non-com- pliance with a decree for restitution of con- jugal rights. Mr. L. C. Elliott appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in six months.
SAUNDERS v SAUNDERS.
Daniel George Saunders was the petitioner in a suit against Rhoda Olive Saunders (for- merly Walker) for desertion by reason of non- compliance with an order for the restitution of conjugal rights. The parties were married at the Registry Office, Kingston, Surrey, Eng- land, on September 23, 1911. Mr. L. C. Elliott appeared for the petitioner. His Honor gran- ted a decree nisi, which was made returnable
in six months.
BASHFORD v BASHFORD.
Alleging desertion, by reason of non-com- pliance with a decree for restitution of con- jugal rights, Alfred John Bashford petitioned for a divorce from Agnes Mcpherson Bash- ford (formerly Davis). The parties were married at Sydney, on June 29, 1911, accord- ing to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church. Mr. L. C. Elliott appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in six months.
SNELL v SNELL.
This was a petition by Edward James Snell,
for a divorce from Mildred Snell (formerly Holden), on the ground of desertion. The parties were married at the Registry Office, Paddington, England, on February 2, 1917. Mr. L. C. Elliott represented the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in
six months.
LAWSON v LAWSON.
The petitioner, Sydney James Lawson, sought
a divorce from Elsie May Lawson (formerly Mason) on the ground of adultery. The parties were married at Woollahra, on May 16, 1912, according to the rites of the Congregational Church. Mr. L. C. Elliott appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, which was made returnable in six months.
LEWIS v LEWIS.
This was a petition by John Kennedy Lewis for a divorce from Gladys Lewis (formerly Weekes) on the ground of adultery. The parties were married at Manly, on June 8, 1910, according to the rites of the Roman Catholic
Church. Mr. L. C. Elliott represented the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in six months.
FERGUSON v FERGUSON.
In this matter, Ada Ferguson (formerly Thompson) petitioned for a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights against Robert James Ferguson, to whom she was married at Sydney, on March 2, 1898, according to the rites of the Church of England. Mr. J. B. Frawley appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree ordering the respon- dent to return to the petitioner within 21 days of service upon him of a copy of the
decree.
CRANBY v CRANBY.
Norman Hugo Cranby was the petitioner in a suit for divorce against Victoria Gwladys Cranby (formerly Scott) on the ground of desertion. The parties were married at Papa- nui, New Zealand, on December 23, 1909, ac- cording to the rites of the Anglican Church. Mr. W. C. Moseley appeared for the petitioner. His Honor granted a decree nisi, returnable in six months.